Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Planning Committee Minutes

Date:
Wednesday, 30th April, 2008
Time:
1.30pm
Place:
Lecture Hall, Stockton Central Library, Church Road, Stockton on Tees, TS18 1TU
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Roy Rix (Chairman), Cllr Hilary Aggio, Cllr Mrs Jennie Beaumont, Cllr Phillip Broughton, Cllr David Coleman (vice Cllr Paul Kirton), Cllr Maurice Frankland (vice Cllr Jim Beall), Cllr John Gardner, Cllr Robert Gibson, Cllr David Harrington, Cllr Miss Tina Large, Cllr Bill Noble, Cllr Ross Patterson, Cllr Mrs Maureen Rigg, Cllr Steve Walmsley
Officers:
P Whaley, C Straughan, R McGuckin, P Shovlin, J Roberts, C Snowdon, M Brownlee, J Hutchcraft (DNS); S Johnson, J Butcher (LD)
In Attendance:
Applicants, agents and members of the public
Apologies for absence:
Cllr Jim Beall, Cllr Paul Kirton
Item Description Decision
Public
P
15/08
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 
P
16/08
08/0493/PND
18 LEVEN ROAD, YARM, TS15 9JE
APPLICATION FOR PRIOR DETERMINATION FOR THE DEMOLITION OF 18 LEVEN ROAD

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0493/PND be deferred for further ecological information with particular reference to bats.
P
17/08
08/0464/FUL
SUMMER HILL, HIGH LANE, MALTBY, MIDDLESBROUGH
FIRST FLOOR AND SINGLE STOREY EXTENSIONS TO FRONT AND SIDE INCLUDING DORMER WINDOWS AND SINGLE STOREY DOUBLE GARAGE TO FRONT

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0464/FUL be refused for the following reason:-

1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed dwelling and garage to the front would form an incongruous element in the streetscene and is contrary to advice given in Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 2 and Policies GP1 and HO12 of the adopted Stockton on Tees Local Plan.

2. The proposed development would have an adverse impact on local visual amenity as the resulting dwelling would be out of character in a local streetscene dominated by bungalows, contrary to policies GP1 and HO12 of the adopted Stockton on Tees Local Plan and advice given in Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 2.

3. The proposed development would, by virtue of height and mass, have an unacceptable overbearing impact on, and to the detriment of the amenity of occupants of neighbouring properties, contrary to policies GP1 and HO12 of the adopted Local Plan and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 2.

4. The proposed development is considered to be overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of the amenity of the occupants of the existing dwelling, contrary to policies GP1 and HO12 of the adopted Stockton on Tees Local Plan and advice given in Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 2.
P
18/08
08/0344/FUL
5 MEADOW WALK, CARLTON, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
LOFT CONVERSION INVOLVING RAISING THE HEIGHT OF ROOF RIDGE AND ERECTION OF 5 NO. DORMER WINDOWS

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0344/FUL be approved subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s); unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
SBC0004 8 April 2008
SBC0005 8 April 2008
SBC0001 12 February 2008

2. The proposed triangular window in the north side gable of the property shall be glazed with obscure glass and non-opening in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development commences. The approved scheme of glazing shall be installed before the development hereby permitted is brought into use and shall remain for the life of the building hereby permitted.

3. The external finishing materials shall match with those of the existing building.
P
19/08
08/0051/FUL
LAND ADJACENT TO 7 FINCHLEY ROAD, NORTON
ERECTION OF 1 NO. DETACHED DWELLINGHOUSE

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0051/FUL be approved subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s); unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
DRG 07-01A 6 March 2008
DRG 07-02A 6 March 2008
DRG 07-04A 6 March 2008
DRG 07-05A 6 March 2008
DRG 07-06A 6 March 2008
DRG 07-07A 6 March 2008
SBC001 9 January 2008

2. Construction of the external walls and roof shall not commence until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the structures hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

3. Full details of the proposed means of disposal of surface water and foul drainage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted and shall be provided in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into use.

4. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, a detailed scheme showing existing ground levels, finished ground levels and finished floor levels. Thereafter the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

5. No development shall take place within the area indicated until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has completed the implementation of a phased programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6. Notwithstanding the proposals detailed in the submitted plans, no development shall commence until full details of soft landscaping have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This will be a detailed planting plan and specification of works indicating soil depths, plant species, numbers, densities, locations, stock size and type, grass, and planting methods including construction techniques for pits in hard surfacing and root barriers. All works shall be in accordance with the Councils Design Guide Specification (residential and industrial estates development) current edition, BS4428: 1989, Code of Practice for General Landscape Operations, and the Horticultural Trades Association (2002) Code of Practice. All existing or proposed utility services that may influence proposed tree planting shall be indicated on the planting plan. The scheme shall be completed in the first planting season following commencement of the development or prior to the occupation of any part of the development and the development shall not be brought into use until the scheme has been completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

7. Notwithstanding the proposals detailed in the submitted plans no development shall commence until full details of proposed hard landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This will include all external finishing materials, colours finishes and fixings. The scheme shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority according to the approved details within a period of 12 months from the date on which the development commenced or prior to the occupation of any part of the development. Any defects in materials or workmanship appearing within a period of 12 months from completion of the total development shall be made good by the owner as soon as practicably possible.

8. Details of all means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development commences. Such means of enclosure shall be erected in accordance with the approved details before the development, hereby approved, is occupied.

9. No construction works shall be carried out on site outside of the periods 8.00am - 6.00pm on weekdays and 8.00am - 1.00pm on Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order), the building(s) hereby approved shall not be extended or altered in any way without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

11. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking or re-enacting that Order), no integral garages shall be converted into part of the house without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
P
20/08
08/0241/OUT
LAND AT URLAY NOOK ROAD, EAGLESCLIFFE, STOCKTON ON TEES
REVISED OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPRISING THE ERECTION OF B2 AND B8 USE CLASS UNITS AND ASSOCIATED MEANS OF ACCESS.

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0241/OUT be deferred to address highway matters.
P
21/08
08/0530/FUL
20 BROADLANDS, INGLEBY BARWICK, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO SIDE

RESOLVED that planning application 08/0530/FUL be approved subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s); unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
20B/003 3 March 2008
20B/001 3 March 2008
0001 SHEET 1/1 26 March 2008

2. The external finishing materials shall match with those of the existing building.
P
22/08
07/2319/ARC
BISHOPSGARTH COTTAGES, DARLINGTON BACK LANE, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 73 TO AMEND CONDITION NO.2 (APPROVED PLANS) OF PLANNING APPROVAL 06/0461/REV

RESOLVED that planning application 07/2319/ARC be deferred for the receipt and consideration of a design and access statement.
P
23/08
BUILDINGS OF LOCAL ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC INTEREST (LOCAL LIST)
CONSERVATION AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT FOLDER
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT

RESOLVED that:-

1. The first round of buildings considered by the expert panel, be endorsed, subject to recommendation 2 below, and be forwarded to Cabinet for its consideration for inclusion as a Supplementary Planning Document in the Conservation and Historic Environment Folder (CaHEF SPD).

2. Cabinet be advised of the comments of the Planning Committee as follows:-

a) concern regarding the selection of the independent panel and in particular that it did not contain any lay members, only professionals.
b) a request that 18 Leven Road, Yarm (Wainstones) be reconsidered for inclusion in the List.
c) Committee endorse that it is important to retain the arms length decision making process via the panel.
P
24/08
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK STEERING GROUP MINUTES
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 29th January 2008 be confirmed.
P
25/08
1. APPEAL - MESSRS M TAHIR & STORR - 56/58 BASSLETON LANE THORNABY - 07/1623/OUT - DISMISSED
2. APPEAL - MR WILLIAM GATE - BRIDGE HOUSE 124 HIGH STREET YARM - 07/2399/COU - DISMISSED
3. APPEAL - MR W TYRES - THE GARTH 1 AISLABY GRANGE BUNGALOWS EAGLESCLIFFE - 07/2196/REV - ALLOWED WITH CONDITIONS
4. APPEAL - CLARION HOMES LIMITED - CLOCK HOUSE LEVEN ROAD YARM - 06/0996/FUL - ALLOWED WITH CONDITIONS
5. APPEAL - CLEOLA LIMITED - SPRINGS HEALTH AND FITNESS CLUB TEESSIDE RETAIL PARK STOCKTON 06/3648/FUL - DISMISSED

RESOLVED that the information be noted.
1.30/4.00

Preamble

ItemPreamble
P
15/08
There were no declarations of interest.
P
16/08
Consideration was given to an application for prior approval for the demolition of 18 Leven Road, Yarm. It was explained that the Local Planning Authority previously determined that prior approval for the demolition was required, and since that time further details for the means of demolition and site restoration had been received.

Members were advised that in accordance with Class A Part 31 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order) 1995 (demolition of buildings) and Circular 10/95, the demolition of the majority of residential properties was classed as permitted development. This was subject to acceptable demolition methods and restoration of the site.

It was noted that the application did not allow the local planning authority to refuse to allow the demolition but only determine how it would be demolished.

Members were advised that some of the objections to the proposed demolition of Wainstones had raised the issue of the property being placed on the local list. It was explained that the concerns could not be considered under the prior notification procedures as only the methods of demolition and restoration of the site could be assessed and no weight could be attached to such representations.

The Committee was presented with an update report that outlined comments received from the Head of Technical Services and Natural England. It also outlined that an additional letter of objection had been received.

Members of the Committee raised concerns in relation to ecological information and considered that the application should be deferred to allow for further information to be submitted with particular reference to bats.

The agent for the application was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee.

A resident was in attendance at the meeting and objected to the proposal.
P
17/08
Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of first floor and single storey extensions to the front and side including dormer windows and a single storey double garage to the front. The application site was a detached bungalow known as ‘Summerhill', High Lane, Maltby. The dwelling had an extended garden area to the side and was located within a street scene of mixed and varied house types.

It was explained that the application was the fourth planning submission with the last planning application 05/2969/FUL being refused at planning committee on the 15th March 2006. The difference between this application and the previous applications was that the garage element had been increased in length creating a double detached garage. Details of the previous reasons for refusal were given.

Members were advised that a total of 21 letters of objection had been received from neighbouring residents and 1 letter from Maltby Parish Council had been received.

The Head of Technical Services had raised no objection to the proposal on access and highway safety grounds.

It was advised that the revised application did not address Members' concerns, and on that basis, the application was referred to Committee for a decision.

An update report was presented to Members of the Committee. The update report outlined the response of the Landscape Architect, who raised no objection to the scheme, an additional letter of objection and a letter from a neighbouring resident. The update report also detailed an email received from the applicant's agent.

Members of the Committee considered that the detached double garage formed an incongruous element to the street scene, making the proposal unacceptable. Members of the Committee requested that the reasons for refusal include those that formed the original reasons for refusal on 15th March 2006, as they were of the opinion that all the elements of the application still remained unacceptable, not just the garage proposals.

The agent for the application was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee.

Three residents and a Parish Councillor objected to the proposal.
P
18/08
Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission to increase the roof height and to install 2 dormer windows to the front elevation and 3 dormer windows to the rear of 5 Meadow Walk, Carlton.

The Committee was advised that the proposal had generated a total of 8 objections, which included comments from Carlton Parish Council and a neighbour who had submitted a second letter of representation.

The concerns raised related to the design and scale of the development in relation to the existing property and the surrounding dwellings within the streetscene. Residents were concerned that the property would impact upon privacy and amenity and was too close in proximity to their properties.

It was advised that no objections had been received from the Urban Design Manager in respect of Highways and Landscape matters.

The Committee was presented with an update report that outlined further information in relation to the principles contained within SPG2: Householder Extension Guide.

On the whole, Members of the Committee considered that the proposal was an acceptable form of development and would not unduly detract from the character of the property or the streetscene in terms of scale, design and proportion. The design and layout was considered to maintain the privacy and amenity of the occupants of the neighbouring dwellings and would not have an adverse impact in terms of overbearing or loss of light.

The applicant was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee.

A resident was in attendance and objected to the proposal.
P
19/08
Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of a two-storey detached dwelling with integral garage. A similar permission was granted in 1985 but was never implemented. The application site was an area of garden adjacent to the side of 7 Finchley Road, which was a semi-detached dwelling located at the end of a residential cul-de-sac.

It was explained that the application site was located at the end of a residential cul-de-sac, which was dominated by semi-detached dwellings with hipped roofs. The site was bounded on the south and east by the rear gardens of properties along Cottersloe Road and the highway of Finchley Road lay to the north.

The Committee was advised that objection letters had been received from 9 properties with comments from one further property.

The Committee was advised that the main planning considerations related to highway safety, visual impact and any impact on the privacy and amenity of the occupants of neighbouring properties.

On the whole, Members considered that the proposed development was acceptable.

The applicant was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee.

The Chairman of the Committee read out an email on behalf of a resident, objecting to the proposed development, who was unable to attend the meeting.

A resident was in attendance at the meeting and objected to the proposal.
P
20/08
Members of the Committee were advised that information in relation to highway matters was not available. Officers advised that it was not possible to assess the highway impact of the proposed development at the time of the meeting and therefore officers were not in a position to make recommendations. Members of the Committee agreed to defer the application.
P
21/08
Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of a two-storey extension to the side of 20 Broadlands, Ingleby Barwick.

The Committee was advised that no objections had been received as a result of publicising the application. An update report presented to the Committee outlined that since the main report, comments had been received from Ingleby Barwick Town Council expressing concerns that the extension appeared to be very close to the neighbouring property.

The application was being reported to the Planning Committee for determination as the application had been submitted by an employee of the Council who worked in the Highways Department.

Members of the Committee considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the privacy and amenity of the neighbouring properties, the character of the area or highway safety.
P
22/08
Members of the Committee were reminded that the application was previously recommended for approval at Committee on the 21st November 2007. However, prior to Committee determining the application, it visited the site and noted that there were several areas of the development which were not in accordance with the plans being considered for approval. Consideration of the application was therefore deferred to clarify the situation and secure correct plans for Committee to consider. The Committee was advised that the revised plans showing the development as built had been received.

It had further come to light that the application required the submission of a Design and Access Statement. It was explained that legislation now provided that the local planning authority must not entertain an application which was not accompanied by the requisite documents, the design and access statement being such a document.

Members of the Committee agreed to defer consideration of the application for the receipt and consideration of a design and access statement.
P
23/08
Consideration was given to a report that advised planning committee on the provisional list of Buildings of Local Architectural and Historic Interest to be adopted into the Conservation and Historic Environment Folder, Supplementary Planning Document (CaHEF SPD).

Members of the Committee were advised that the first round of buildings had been considered by the independent expert panel and they had compiled the list with nominations for inclusion/exclusion. The Committee was provided with a copy of the list.

Members of the Committee discussed the report, in particular, the selection process for the independent panel.

The Committee discussed the decision of the independent panel not to include Wainstones, 18 Leven Road, on the Local List and agreed that a request should be made for it to be reconsidered by the panel.

The Vice Chair of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (Stockton) was in attendance at the meeting and spoke in support of Wainstones, 18 Leven Road, Yarm to be reconsidered for the Local List. A resident also spoke in support of Wainstones.

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction